The right of transit through each State, with every species of property known to the Constitution of the United States, and recognized by that paramount law, is secured by that instrument to each citizen, and does not depend upon the uncertain and changeable ground of mere comity.

The character of immigrant or traveler, bringing with him a slave into this State, must last so long as it is necessary, by the ordinary modes of travel, to accomplish a transit through the State. ¡Nothing but accident or imperative necessity could excuse a greater delay. Something more than mere ease or convenience must intervene to save a forfeiture of property which he cannot hold as a citizen of the State through which he is passing.

But visitors for health or pleasure, stand in a position different from travelers on business, and are protected by the law of comity.

It is the right of the judiciary, in the absence of legislation, to determine how far the policy and position of this State will justify the giving a temporary effect, within the limits of this State, to the laws and institutions of a sister State. To allow mere visitors to this State for pleasure or health, to bring with them, as personal attendants, their own domestics, is not any violation of the end contemplated by the Constitution of this State.

The visible acts of a party must be taken as the only test of his intentions, in deciding whether he is entitled to be considered a mere visitor; of which fact his declarations constitute no evidence.

The privileges extended to visitors cannot be extended to those who come for both business and pleasure. A mere visitor is one who comes only for pleasure or health, and who engages in no business while here, and remains only for a reasonable time. If the party engage in any business, or employ his slave in any business except as a personal attendant upon himself or family, then the character of visitor is lost, and his slave is entitled to freedom.

This rule admits of no exception upon the ground of necessity or misfortune, or it would introduce uncertainty and complexity, and lead the Courts into profitless investigations. The pecuniary condition of the party is difficult of proof and will not be inquired into; nor will the rule be relaxed to meet the hardships of a particular ease.—Burnett, J.

Where the facts show that the delay of the visitor was unavoidable, the fact of his engaging in labor, in order to support himself during his necessary detention, does not divest his rights under the law of comity.—Terry, C. J.